W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Slightly updated CP for 124

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 04:17:00 -0800
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <B0C22F65-401D-403F-AEAA-CEEA876F6928@apple.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>

On Nov 8, 2010, at 4:08 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:

> On Nov 7, 2010, at 20:21, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Change the introductions in [2] and [3] to allow the relation on <link> as well.
> [...]
>> 3. Conformance Classes Changes
>> None.
> It seems to me the Change Proposal is internally inconsistent. Surely the change being proposed would change at least document conformance (and maybe also search engine conformance).

I would expect the change to noreferrer behavior to affect UA conformance as well, and there probably should be language in the Details section spelling out how. 

That is to say: I assume the intent is that <link rel="stylesheet noreferer"> suppresses sending of the Referer header as it would for the <a> element, otherwise the result of making this markup conforming would be rather confusing. However, it does not seem like the Change Proposal as written would have this effect. Specifically, the current spec language only suppresses Referer when following a hyperlink, but certain relations on the <link> element, such as rel="stylesheet" or rel="icon", create an external resource link rather than a hyperlink:


Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 12:22:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:27 UTC